No lzma sdk in fedora

Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler at
Sat Feb 13 09:59:50 UTC 2010

John Reiser wrote:
> The previous editions lzma442, 443, 449, 457, 458, 459,
> all required *different* adaptations by upx.
> So a separate Fedora source package would have been of little value,
> except possibly as an indicator of the need for a -libs package.
> But during that time, creating a -libs package appeared to be
> incompatible with the licensing.  [Today "LZMA SDK is placed in
> the public domain".]

Could we build a lzma-upx-static subpackage out of the LZMA SDK SRPM 
shipping a lzma-upx.a built with UPX's adaptations and which UPX would BR?

        Kevin Kofler

More information about the devel mailing list